APO M 35 Summicron??

[Ken Abrahams]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the 35 M ASPH Summicron, a great lens however I am needing something "more" from a 35 focal length lens. I have been looking at the 35 M Summilux 1.4 and like the quality this lens is capable of. I am wondering however whether Leica might produce an APO M 35 F2.0 considering the SL 35 APO release? An APO 35 M would compliment my 50 and 90 APO.  I use M lenses on my M Monochrom and SL cameras and tend to favour the 35 lens perspective.  

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

I'm afraid a 35mm APO-Summicron (-L or -M) is a triumph of marketing over scientific reality.

Shame on Leica.

APO has (or had, anyway) a specific meaning - the ability of a lens to focus three colors in the same image plane. It is short for Apochromat. And means the elimination of Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration. It is not (or should not be) a generic trademark for "extra-good lens."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat

This is something wide-angle lenses do anyway, except perhaps for the most bottle-glass cheapies, or a 35 used to produce an effective "140mm" lens on some tiny-sensor P&S camera. The DoF and the reduced magnification of the world mean that even a 1958 35mm Summicron v.1 is already effectively apochromatic, as is every 35mm Summicron made since.

It is (and has always been) long lenses (or telescopes), with shallow DoF and high magnification, and occasionally very large apertures, where the APO designation makes sense. The first APO M lens was the 135mm APO-Telyt, the second the 90mm APO-Summicron, the third the 75mm APO-Summicron (you see the pattern). In the R system, the only APO lenses were 90mm or longer (and not even all of those).

Note the quote in that wiki-link:

Quote

Independent tests can be used to demonstrate that the "APO" designation is used rather loosely by some photographic lens manufacturers to describe the color accuracy of their lenses, as comparable lenses have shown superior color accuracy even though they did not carry the "APO" designation.

It is sad to see Leica fall into that category. Dr. Mandler (who designed Leitz/Leica's first real APO lens, the 180mm APO-Telyt f/3.4) and the Leitzes must be rolling in their graves.

That doesn't mean Leica can't produce a "better" 35mm f/2 M lens at some point. It just means that if they call it an APO, it is like BMW promoting the fact that "Our cars have FOUR wheels!!" - not really a significant achievement over other cars.

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by adan

[Ken Abrahams]

Many thanks for your well informed outlines on APO lens design. Thanks

ken 

[lct]

Would be interesting to know what an apo correction may bring to 35mm lenses though. Nothing really?

[Guest]

Implementing the new design (after more than 20 years) which already exists for the SL would be highly appreaciated imo.

Who would spend that much for a 2/50 was answered very favourably since the 50APO appeared. 
Hopefuly the M - 2.0/35 APO will be introduced with the next M camera.
 

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by tri

[evikne]

I am more curious what the long time rumored 35mm Noctilux will look like. I often prefer the 35mm field of view, but because I love shallow depth of field I usually choose a 50mm instead. 

But the price and size would probably make it not so versatile anyway … 😉

Edited December 26, 2019 by evikne

[james.liam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Zeiss 1,4/35 comes closer to your needs than anything presently out there. 

[Jeff S]

Karbe said that his SL 35 APO (sorry, Andy) Summicron is his best lens ever, due in large part to the extra space provided by the uniform SL barrel size. Otherwise the SL 35 would have been the smallest of the new Summicrons.  

My concern is that Leica has been focusing more on performance stats and marketing (even if faster and stellar) than creating more small gems, including the M line (50 APO M Summicron excepted).  If and when we get a ‘better’ 35 M, let’s hope it follows the 50 APO size model, and not a bigger and heavier beast.

Jeff

[lct]

52 minutes ago, james.liam said:

The Zeiss 1,4/35 comes closer to your needs than anything presently out there. 

For a 35 as big as a 90 thanks no thanks.

[lct]

15 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

If and when we get a ‘better’ 35 M, let’s hope it follows the 50 APO size model, and not a bigger and heavier beast.

+1

[james.liam]

25 minutes ago, lct said:

For a 35 as big as a 90 thanks no thanks.

At this moment it’s as good as it gets for an M-mount 35. Personally, have not found it all that big having come from DSLRs only a few years back though it is counter to the Barnack ethos. The only lens of that heft I am willing to accept is the 75 Summilux. 

[Stuart Richardson]

What is it that you are missing from the 35mm Summicron ASPH? If you answer that question, it may be easier to suggest a course of action. It may well be that you would be better served by changing to a medium format camera like the X1DII, rather than spend that money on a lens. I have the 35mm Summilux FLE, and while it is great, I am not sure that it is really all that different than the Summicron other than in size and speed. I had a 35mm Summarit for awhile and the performance was nearly the same as the Summilux, just one and a half stops slower...it was not quite as good, but it was almost splitting hairs on the M9 and film.

Edited December 26, 2019 by Stuart Richardson

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

What is it that you are missing from the 35mm Summicron ASPH? If you answer that question, it may be easier to suggest a course of action. It may well be that you would be better served by changing to a medium format camera like the X1DII, rather than spend that money on a lens. I have the 35mm Summilux FLE, and while it is great, I am not sure that it is really all that different than the Summicron other than in size and speed. I had a 35mm Summarit for awhile and the performance was nearly the same as the Summilux, just one and a half stops slower...it was not quite as good, but it was almost splitting hairs on the M9 and film.

Karbe did say that the SL 35 is “the best lens ever” (video interview with Hugh Brownstone).  But he didn’t distinguish if he meant lenses he’s created, format or brand.  But MF can indeed provide something FF cannot, under the right circumstances.  User talent and workflow remain key.

Jeff

[Ken Abrahams]

Hi Stuart, I hear what you say about the differences between the 35 Summilux and Summicron. I have been researching the lens, tested the lens on my M Mono and seeing results that set the two lenses apart. The resolution and sharpness of the 1.4 is one thing that stands out for me. The obvious difference being the depth of field and use of bokeh. On one test shot I did with a Summilux 35, I was lazy and framed the image from further away instead of a closer composition. It was also too bright and I had to stop the lens down. The image was a good one but I had to crop into it for better composition. The resulting image reminded me of the 50 APO M lens and its ability for detail. Perhaps my question about a 35 M "APO" was born from this?

The 35 Summicron M is a good lens but I am needing "something more". Maybe the Summilux 1.4 can provide that extra quality I am after especially if there is no 35 "APO" M lens forthcoming. Having two 35 mm lenses isn't a bad idea for me although seems a little extravagant for a working man's hobby.

I am very happy with the SL and M Monochrome camera pairing and have no intentions of going medium format, nor will I be purchasing any SL lenses.    

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Stuart Richardson]

If you have a look at the datasheets, you can get a feel for the performance of the two lenses. If you look at the MTF, you will see that they have quite similar performance at most f stops on an M body. The Summilux might be ever so slightly ahead at 5.6, but otherwise I think it is more likely that sample variation and body mismatches will play a greater roll than the difference between the two lenses. I cannot guarantee that, it is just my feeling.  If you are noting performance on the SL, however, the 35mm Summilux might indeed be better, as it appears to be a more retrofocal lens...more suited to digital sensors than the 35mm Summicron. But neither is likely to come close to the 35mm SL Summicron, which is a more recent design made for digital sensors. At the moment, I think it is very unlikely that the 35mm Summicron SL will receive an M version, since the design criteria are quite different. The lenses need to be smaller, lighter and manual focus. They should try to intrude minimally on the VF, and the 35mm SL is far larger and would intrude substantially into the viewfinder. 

[ELAN]

My dream lens would be a 35mm that looks and feels and renders like the 50 APO Black Chrome (but in silver chrome). 

[otto.f]

28 minutes ago, ELAN said:

My dream lens would be a 35mm that looks and feels and renders like the 50 APO Black Chrome (but in silver chrome). 

Yes perhaps Leica has lost its compass? Making a 90/1.5 for the SL and a new Summicron 35 for the M would have been much more appropriate.

Edited December 29, 2019 by otto.f

[jaapv]

On 12/26/2019 at 4:03 PM, Jeff S said:

Karbe said that his SL 35 APO (sorry, Andy) Summicron is his best lens ever, due in large part to the extra space provided by the uniform SL barrel size. Otherwise the SL 35 would have been the smallest of the new Summicrons.  

My concern is that Leica has been focusing more on performance stats and marketing (even if faster and stellar) than creating more small gems, including the M line (50 APO M Summicron excepted).  If and when we get a ‘better’ 35 M, let’s hope it follows the 50 APO size model, and not a bigger and heavier beast.

Jeff

That is probably true, but it has nothing to do with being "APO" Andy's point is that Leica has modified the designation "APO" to mean "thigh end" for marketing reasons.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

I would have thought that an apo lens is a lens with one or several apochromatic elements. 

[jaapv]

Err- no.  As Andy explains, it is a lens that focuses in the same plane for all three RGB colours in three points of the image plane (Leica uses four), by whichever correction method.
As only three points are specified, an APO lens can still give severe chromatic aberration...   But usually doesn't.

Wideangle lenses are by nature apochromatic, the correction for chromatic aberration becomes more important - and difficult- as focal length increases.